PURPOSE: To determine how best to time respiratory surrogate-based tumor motion model updates by comparing a novel technique based on external measurements alone to three direct measurement methods. METHODS: Concurrently measured tumor and respiratory surrogate positions from 166 treatment fractions for lung or pancreas lesions were analyzed. Partial-least-squares regression models of tumor position from marker motion were created from the first six measurements in each dataset. Successive tumor localizations were obtained at a rate of once per minute on average. Model updates were timed according to four methods: never, respiratory surrogate-based (when metrics based on respiratory surrogate measurements exceeded confidence limits), error-based (when localization error ≥ 3 mm), and always (approximately once per minute). RESULTS: Radial tumor displacement prediction errors (mean ± standard deviation) for the four schema described above were 2.4 ± 1.2, 1.9 ± 0.9, 1.9 ± 0.8, and 1.7 ± 0.8 mm, respectively. The never-update error was significantly larger than errors of the other methods. Mean update counts over 20 min were 0, 4, 9, and 24, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The same improvement in tumor localization accuracy could be achieved through any of the three update methods, but significantly fewer updates were required when the respiratory surrogate method was utilized. This study establishes the feasibility of timing image acquisitions for updating respiratory surrogate models without direct tumor localization.
PURPOSE: To determine how best to time respiratory surrogate-based tumor motion model updates by comparing a novel technique based on external measurements alone to three direct measurement methods. METHODS: Concurrently measured tumor and respiratory surrogate positions from 166 treatment fractions for lung or pancreas lesions were analyzed. Partial-least-squares regression models of tumor position from marker motion were created from the first six measurements in each dataset. Successive tumor localizations were obtained at a rate of once per minute on average. Model updates were timed according to four methods: never, respiratory surrogate-based (when metrics based on respiratory surrogate measurements exceeded confidence limits), error-based (when localization error ≥ 3 mm), and always (approximately once per minute). RESULTS: Radial tumor displacement prediction errors (mean ± standard deviation) for the four schema described above were 2.4 ± 1.2, 1.9 ± 0.9, 1.9 ± 0.8, and 1.7 ± 0.8 mm, respectively. The never-update error was significantly larger than errors of the other methods. Mean update counts over 20 min were 0, 4, 9, and 24, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The same improvement in tumor localization accuracy could be achieved through any of the three update methods, but significantly fewer updates were required when the respiratory surrogate method was utilized. This study establishes the feasibility of timing image acquisitions for updating respiratory surrogate models without direct tumor localization.
Authors: Jing Cai; Robert McLawhorn; Paul W Read; James M Larner; Fang-fang Yin; Stanley H Benedict; Ke Sheng Journal: Med Phys Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Twyla R Willoughby; Alan R Forbes; Daniel Buchholz; Katja M Langen; Thomas H Wagner; Omar A Zeidan; Patrick A Kupelian; Sanford L Meeks Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2006-08-02 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Amit Sawant; Raghu Venkat; Vikram Srivastava; David Carlson; Sergey Povzner; Herb Cattell; Paul Keall Journal: Med Phys Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Judit Boda-Heggemann; Anika Jahnke; Mark K H Chan; Leila S Ghaderi Ardekani; Peter Hunold; Jost Philipp Schäfer; Stefan Huttenlocher; Stefan Wurster; Dirk Rades; Guido Hildebrandt; Frank Lohr; Jürgen Dunst; Frederik Wenz; Oliver Blanck Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2018-02-05 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Susanne Stera; Panagiotis Balermpas; Mark K H Chan; Stefan Huttenlocher; Stefan Wurster; Christian Keller; Detlef Imhoff; Dirk Rades; Jürgen Dunst; Claus Rödel; Guido Hildebrandt; Oliver Blanck Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2017-09-05 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Sharmi Biswas; Irina Kapitanova; Sabrina Divekar; Jimm Grimm; Ian J Butterwick; Daniel Garren; Lawrence R Kleinberg; Kristin J Redmond; Michel Lacroix; Anand Mahadevan; Kenneth M Forster Journal: Technol Cancer Res Treat Date: 2021 Jan-Dec
Authors: Niclas Pettersson; Oluwaseyi M Oderinde; James Murphy; Daniel Simpson; Laura I Cerviño Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2020-03-14 Impact factor: 2.102